In the ring Z[√-5], 2 is irreducible but not prime. We have 2*3 = 6 = (1 + √-5)(1 - √-5), so 2 divides 6. However, 2 does not divide (1 + √-5) and 2 does not divide (1 - √-5).
I realize this video is ancient, but nonetheless i noticed how your example references your work on orbifolds; as per the video request, commenting to see more!
you are a very good teacher thank you
Would love to see a video about ring of invariants
yeah, a video about rings of invariants would be great. thanks :-)
In the ring Z[√-5], 2 is irreducible but not prime. We have 2*3 = 6 = (1 + √-5)(1 - √-5), so 2 divides 6. However, 2 does not divide (1 + √-5) and 2 does not divide (1 - √-5).
your videos make me feel big brain lol. Great job btw.
Do you ever think of doing book reviews? I love to see your library of maths books.
Nice video! One about Galois Theory // Topology would be so nice! ❤️
Yes please, a video about rings of invariants would be wonderful 🎉
I comment because I want to see a video about rings of invariants :)
Video on rings of invariant would be highly appreciated Prof Penn
waiting for rings of invariants
I would like to see a video about rings of invariants please =)
Rings of invariants please:)
a^2 > or = 0 is called the trivial inequality
I realize this video is ancient, but nonetheless i noticed how your example references your work on orbifolds; as per the video request, commenting to see more!
Try out inmo(indian national maths Olympiad(
This means that the fundamental theorem of aritmetic doenst function properly when talking about other sets?
you're gonna have a good time
I want this video :)
Tres interessant svp pouvez vous sous titres en francais
After years still no ring invariant
noice